Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8150 13
Original file (NR8150 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 8, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001

 

TAL

Docket No: 8150-13
123 September 2014

we we

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, United
States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 5 September 2014. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes,
regulations, and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 19 December 1973 after more than
two years of prior honorable service. On 2 April 1974, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to go to your
appointed place of duty. On 4 April 1974, you were counseled
regarding your obligation to pay your just debts and warned that
further offenses could result in administrative separation. On
20 December 1974, you received NUP for two instances of failure
to go to your appointed place of duty. on 31 December 1974 you
were again counseled for failure to pay support to your
dependents. You were notified of pending administrative

discharge processing due to unfitness (indebtedness). You
elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 13 January 1975,

the ADB found that you committed misconduct and recommended that
you be separated with a general discharge. The ‘separation
authority concurred with the recommendation of the ADB, and
directed your commanding officer to issue you a general
discharge by reason of unfitness (indebtedness-failure to pay
just debts) and on 3 February 1975, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable
service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
due to the seriougness of your misconduct that resulted in two
NOPs and non-support of your dependents. The Board also
believed that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge
since a characterization under other than honorable conditions
is often directed when a Sailor is separated for unfitness.
Concerning your assertion that you were discharged due to racial
prejudice, you did not supply any evidence to support it and.the
Board found no such evidence in your service record. Finally,
there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows
for recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of
time. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

    

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Fxecutive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06130-10

    Original file (06130-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 25 September and 28 November 1972 your command received two letters of indebtedness resulting from your failure to pay just debts. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5909 13

    Original file (NR5909 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11285-10

    Original file (11285-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by the NUP, indebtedness, failure to pay traffic fines which resulted in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09388-07

    Original file (09388-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03451-10

    Original file (03451-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00979-11

    Original file (00979-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 18 December 1994, you were advised that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an andividual is discharged for misconduct and is not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5673 13

    Original file (NR5673 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2014. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, ‘the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01863-09

    Original file (01863-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2009. Therefore, you were recommended for administrative separation with an undesirable discharge (UD) due to being unfit for military service, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 06880-12

    Original file (06880-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001161

    Original file (20130001161.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no evidence to show the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The record shows the separation authority considered the applicant's record and determined he should receive a General Discharge Certificate.